Quick differential geometry questions

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around questions in differential geometry, specifically regarding the nature of points and lines in R^3 as surfaces, and the properties of generalized cylinders over a given curve. The original poster seeks validation of their reasoning and understanding of these concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to prove that a point and a line are not surfaces by demonstrating the failure of homeomorphism. They also explore the smoothness and regularity of a generalized cylinder over the curve y=sin(1/x).

Discussion Status

Participants are engaging with the original poster's reasoning, questioning the rigor of their arguments, and discussing the implications of the definitions involved. Some guidance has been offered regarding the interpretation of the term "the generalized cylinder" and the conditions for regularity.

Contextual Notes

There is a mention of the need for rigorous proofs and the implications of mapping dimensions, as well as the potential ambiguity in the phrasing of the problem regarding the vector a.

akoska
Messages
22
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I just want to know if I'm on the right track with these questions...

1. To prove that a point and a line in R^3 are not surfaces, I showed that the function from an open interval U in R^2 to the intersection of the point/line and a subset W in R^3 cannot be a homeomorphism. This is because the function is not injective.

2. For the curve y= sin(1/x), x does not equal 0, I want to know if the generalized cylinder on this graph is a smooth, regular surface.

Parametrized curve: (u, sin(1/u), 0)

So, sigma(u,v)=(u, sin(1/u), 0) + va

where a is a unit vector in the direction of the translation.

So, I showed that sigma is smooth on R/{0} by showing that all partial derivatives exist at all points except when u=0.

But, I'm having trouble showing the 'regular' part.

sigma_u = (1, -1/u^2 (cos(1/u)), 0)

sigma_v=a

So, for the surface to be regular, the cross product of the above two functions cannot be zero. So, the surface is regular if the tangent vector of the parametrized curve is not parallel to a.

I'm having trouble with this problem because by how the question is phrased, it seems like I'm only supposed to find a yes/no answer, not a 'depending on the vector a' answer. Do you see what I mean? So, I don't know if I'm missing anything, not proving rigorously enough... etc.

Any help would be greatly appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm a little unclear as to what you did with 1) to show there is no homeomorphism. But for part 2), as you point out there are many generalized cylinders over the curve. Since the question says 'THE generalized cylinder', I think I would assume they meant a=unit vector in the z-direction.
 
Ok, thanks.

For 1) I have to show that the function is not a homeomorphism (bijective, function and inverse of the function is continuous). So, I showed that the function is not injective:

For a point: the intersection of the point and a subset W is just a point, p. So the function going from an interval to a point (a constant value) is not injective.

For a line: If u is a unit vector, y=au (a is a scalar) describes a line pointing in direction of u. So, y is a function of 1 variable. So the function going from an interval (of 2 variables) to 1 variable is not injective.

Is this rigorous enough?
 
For a point you are on pretty safe ground. For a line, what is the theorem that says a mapping from a higher dimension space to a lower dimension space can't be injective? Offhand, I don't remember. Can you remind me?
 
Ah, it's because invariance of dimension actually depends on proofs from algebraic topology. But in the case of mapping two dimensions to one its pretty easy. A line is split in two by removing a point but a two dimensional surface is not. But this property is a homeomorphism invariant. If none of this makes any sense, then just go ahead and say it's obviously true. Because it is.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K